Dictator (pronounced dik-tey-ter)
(1) A person exercising absolute power, especially a ruler
who (at least ostensibly) has absolute control (ie effectively not restricted
by a constitution, laws, recognized opposition, etc) in a government (and
officially without hereditary succession); applied particularly to those
exercising tyrannical rule.
(2) In republican ancient Rome, a person vested by the
senate with supreme authority during a crisis, the regular magistracy being
subordinated to him until the crisis was met (typically by conducting a war).
(3) A person who makes pronouncements, as on conduct,
fashion etc, which are regarded as authoritative.
(4) A person who dictates text to someone or some sort or
mechanical or electronic recording device.
(5) In Ancient Rome (during certain periods), an elected
chief magistrate.
1350–1400: From the Middle English dictatour, from the Old French dictator, from the Latin dictātor (genitive dictātōris), (Roman chief magistrate with absolute authority) the
construct being dictā(re) (inflection of dictō (I repeat, say often; I dictate (to someone for writing))),
frequentative of dicere (to say,
speak); I compose, express in writing; I prescribe, recommend, order, dictate))
frequentative of dicere (to say,
speak)" (from the primitive Indo-European root deik- (to show (also "solemnly to pronounce") (and
related to dīcō (say, speak) + -tor (from the Proto-Italic -tōr, from the primitive Indo-European -tōr from -tor-s; the suffix added to the fourth principal part of a verb to
create a third-declension masculine form of an agent noun). The feminine forms were dictatress or
dictatrix, both probably now obsolete except in historic reference or as a
jocular form; the old alternative spelling dictatour is obsolete. Some European languages (including Dutch and
Romanian) were like English and borrowed directly the Latin spelling while
others used variations including Catalan (dictador),
French (dictateur) Italian (dittatore), Piedmontese (ditator), Polish (dyktator), Portuguese (ditador),
Russian (дикта́тор (diktátor)), Sicilian
(dittaturi), Spanish (dictador) and German (Diktator).
The noun dictatorship (office or term of a (Roman) dictator) came into use in the 1610s to describe the historically specific terms of office the Roman Senate sometimes granted individuals in extraordinary and reprehensible circumstances while the now familiar general sense of "a ruler exercising absolute authority" evolved by the late seventeenth century. The noun dictator had already proceeded along this path, the historical sense being first used in English circa 1600, the extension to “one who has absolute power or authority" (in any context and not just political power) noted by the 1690s. The nasty and not infrequently genocidal nature of some of the dictators of the twentieth century and beyond certainly influenced the understanding of the word which, as late as the 1800s could be used neutrally, effectively as a synonym for president. The adjective dictatorial (pertaining to a dictator; absolute, unlimited), dating from 1901 evolved also to enjoy use outside of descriptors of absolute government and by 1704 had acquired the general sense of "imperious, overbearing", usefully (and often applied as required to husbands, mothers-in-law, parish priests etc); the related form was the adverb dictatorially. In that vein, to convey the notion of "pertaining to a dictator" there had been dictatorian (1640s) & dictator-like (1580s). Etymologists insist historic duality of implication in "dictatorial" ((1) a disposition to rule & (2) a sharp insistence upon having one's orders accepted or carried out) has survived in modern use but instances of the former are now less common.
Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) was of course the dictator who has for almost a century loomed over the word and “Hitler” was used figuratively for "a dictator" from as early as 1934, a use persisting despite there being no shortage of dictatorial tyrants in the years since his assumption of power. One amusing variation emerged in England in the early years of World War II (1939-1945), a “little Hitler” being someone appointed to a minor post (archetypically an air-raid warden (someone employed to walk the streets during a “black-out” telling folk to extinguish their lights)) and, cloaked in this brief, unaccustomed authority, soon intoxicated by their power. In the post-revolutionary Islamic Republic of Iran (1979-), the regime encouraged a similar put-down aimed at opponents, the US being شيطان بزرگ (Shaytân-e Bozorg (the great Satan)) and Israel شیطان کوچک, (Shaytân-e Kuchak (the little Satan)) and it’s a worse slight even than it sounds because “great” is not the perfect translation, the idea of the great Satan being one of derision rather than awe. When ayatollahs are in a bad mood (it does happen), sometimes the UK is also described as a “little Satan”.
Lindsay Lohan never forgave dictator Hosni Mubarak (1928–2020; president of Egypt 1981-2011) for shouting at Bill Clinton (b 1946; POTUS 1993-2001). When told in 2011 he’d fallen from power as one of the victims of the Arab Spring, she responded: “Cool.” When told it was brought about by a military coup she replied: “Gross!” Lindsay Lohan doesn’t approve of coups d'état and believes soldiers should "stay in the barracks", allowing due constitutional process to be followed.
Because of the evil of Hitler and his many spiritual successors in this century and the last, dictator really doesn’t cry out for synonyms but autocrat, despot, tyrant, absolutist, authoritarian, oppressor & totalitarian all tend in the direction. Associatively however, the noun generalissimo (supreme military commander), dating from the 1620s and a borrowing of the Italian generalissimo (superlative of generale, from a sense development similar to the French général), can in some cases be applied to dictators because in the twentieth century the title was granted (ie self-conferred) to the dictators comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953), Chiang Kai-shek (1887-1975; leader of the Republic of China (mainland) 1928-1949 & the renegade province of Taiwan 1949-1975) and Francisco Franco (1892-1975; Caudillo of Spain 1939-1975). Despite that roll-call, it has never come into use as a general term for "in the manner of dictator", possibly because historically it's too specific (to the military context) and has just too many syllables to be catchy slang.
The word did however in the twentieth century come widely to be used by historians and political scientists because it was the most conveniently understood term. Use could be loose and not always accurate (indeed, some so-called “dictators” found they weren’t able to be as dictatorial as they’d have preferred) but if the word didn’t describe what someone was, it certainly conveyed what they were not so came best to be understood on the “non-democratic spectrum” as ranging from “authoritarian” to “totalitarian”. So it was convenient verbal shorthand but in democracies it was also deployed (along the lines of “fascist”) as a term of “general disapproval”. Still, within the rich lexicon of political critiques, it has come to be thought rather “mild” which is what in October 2026 made one of the more improbable diplomatic incidents such a surprise. The football (soccer) player Kylian Mbappé (b 1998) captains the French national side and plays professionally for La Liga (the top-flight Spanish competition) club Real Madrid; such is his dominance on and off-field that his nickname is “the dictator”. That attracted the now inevitable memes and, in an interview, he was asked which in this vein was his favourite to which he replied it was one with his face superimposed onto an image of “…some guy – I think he’s a Chinese dictator”. The “some guy” turned out to be comrade Chairman Mao (Mao Zedong 1893–1976; chairman of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) 1949-1976).
The backlash in the PRC (People’s Republic of China) was swift, social media platforms soon alight with outrage anyone, least of all a foreigner, would show disrespect to the comrade chairman, the “father of the nation” who, on 1 October, 1949, read out the formal proclamation establishing the PRC. The commercial cost too was made clear, major Chinese brands such as Dongpeng Beverage and Mengniu Dairy cutting all contractual ties with the player and the state-backed (ie controlled) broadcasters suspended the televising of La Liga matches. Doubtless shocked such a casual comment (he would have thought inoffensive) could provoke such a response, Mr Mbappé’s management team quickly arranged an apology: “My comment was ill-judged, and I now understand that it hurt many people in China and in Chinese communities around the world. I apologise to everyone my words have upset.” Eyes on their spreadsheets, La Liga’s management also issued a statement, saying the organization “…deeply regrets the offence that Kylian Mbappé’s recent comments have caused among Chinese fans” (something between apology & apologia, it translates as: “We’re sorry he said it but it was all down to him and nothing to do with us.”)
Corporations and patriotic citizens in the PRC are culturally obliged to express outrage at any slight directed towards the comrade chairman because he remains the figure (officially) most venerated by the ruling CCP, despite the party’s assessment of his time in office being “70% positive and 30% negative”, those numbers established by comrade Deng Xiaoping (1904–1997; paramount leader of the PRC (People's Republic of China) 1978-1989) in Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of Our Party (1981). The way comrade Deng glossed the record was to make it the orthodoxy that in the memory of comrade Chairman Mao: “merits are primary and his errors secondary”. In other words, the achievements in healthcare, improvements in life expectancy and abolition of “certain cultural backwardness” (feudal practices, foot–binding etc) outweighed the various unpleasantnesses he imposed (The Great Leap Forward (1958–1962); The Cultural Revolution (1966–1976); various crackdowns on dissent). Comrade Deng’s carefully worded piece was nothing like the denunciation of comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) made by comrade Nikita Khrushchev (1894–1971; Soviet leader 1953-1964) in On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences (an address delivered in February 1956 to the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union) but it was still “criticism of a leader”, something now (understandably) rare in the PRC.
As far as is known, the moral outrage in the PRC was “organic” in that it didn’t follow a lead from the CCP but was citizens “working towards the CCP”, things seemingly “kicking off” on Dongqiudi (an on-line football forum) where all the many who commented agreed Mr Mbappé words “hurt the feelings of Chinese people” and were “inappropriate”. Nor was only the text that (thought by some so offensive they refused to translate it into Chinese) attracted disapprobation, the use of a picture of the “father of the nation” whose portrait still overlooks Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, clearly beyond the pale. The sentiment quickly spread with calls to boycott both the French striker and Real Madrid. Presumably pleased by the patriotism, the foreign ministry issued a statement: “We have noted the relevant reports. Words and deeds that hurt the feelings of the Chinese people will naturally be met with opposition from all sectors of Chinese society.” In diplomatic speak, that’s about as gentle as it gets and presumably the CCP’s view will be the storm has fulfilled its purpose and, within a day or two, business as usual may resume, a yellow card sufficient a penalty for Mr Mbappé; no red required.
Times change and context matters: In 2016, Beijing ordered the demolition of a 120 foot (37 metre) tall gold (painted) statute of comrade Chairman Mao, ostensibly because it had been erected “without approval from local government”. The privately-funded project cost a reputed was said to have cost nearly 3 million yuan (US$460,000) and on social media there had been much criticism with many suggesting the funds would have better been allocated to education, health services and such. Sinologists in the West observed the CCP needed to maintain respect for the “father of the nation” but would rather he remain in history and not be too often discussed; he was after all, also the “father of the CCP”.
Desecration of the image aside, presumably it was the juxtaposition of “Chinese” and “dictator” that was thought most offensive although to have had the comrade chairman (indisputably one of the century’s great figures) seemingly not recognized and dismissed a “some guy” does suggest a lack of respect although, in fairness, footballers are experts in other fields. Mr Mbappé acknowledges the light-hearted intent of the meme-makers but is on record saying some “…reveal a lack of political and human awareness. There's a side that's a bit less funny, because we know the damage people like that have caused throughout history. Being compared to people who murder others, or who have made millions upon millions of people miserable... I don't think I've done that in my life.” So, even if not aware of the details of history, he knows some of the figures have “blood on their hands” and a line should be drawn somewhere.
1935 Studebaker Dictator phaeton (left) & 1936 Studebaker Dictator sedan (right).
The Studebaker Dictator was produced between 1927-1937, the naming scheme using titles from government service to indicate a model’s place in the hierarchy, the Dictator replacing the Standard Six as the entry-level model, the progressively more expensive models being the Commander and President. Other manufacturers have adopted the concept idea, Opal in Germany once merging admiralty and political ranks, offering the Kapitän, Commodore, Admiral & Diplomat.
To many it will seem strange a US manufacturer would, as late as 1937, call one of its cars the Dictator but in 1927 the Nazis were years from power and Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & prime-minister of Italy 1922-1943), was far from the tainted character he would later become, public perception of his rule still in the moment of admiring him for “making the trains run on time”. Whether any improvement in punctuality was noted by many Italians is dubious but the Duce would anyway have been pleased at least one train arrived in good time. Because the image of a mass-movement black-shirted supporters taking to the streets to overthrow an old, corrupt government was just the sort of propaganda dictators adore, the 1922 "March on Rome" became part of fascist mythology but although a good "photo opportunity", Mussolini joined the march only for it's final stage; he caught the Naples-Rome train. Studebaker anyway had always explained the name as suggesting “a fine car at a moderate price” that would “dictate the standards” in the vital mid-priced field. That was fair enough but with the benefit of post-Nazi hindsight, when the option of a straight-eight engine was offered as an upgrade from the straight-six, Studebaker probably would not to have used the marketing slogan “a brilliant example of excess power”. By 1937, the use of excess power by the Third Reich’s dictator was becoming obvious and Studebaker quietly dropped the Dictator name for 1938, re-positioning the Commander as the base model, the cars exported to the Europe, the UK and the British Empire having early been renamed Director. Of those changes, probably just about everyone except Henry Ford (1863-1947) approved. Briefly, Studebaker had also offered the Chancellor but, presumably because it wasn’t a title that much resonated in the American imagination, it was short-lived (only in the catalogue for the 1927 season); that was a stroke of luck for Studebaker because Hitler took over the Reich Chancellery in January 1933 and had the Chancellor remained in production, it too would have faced the linguistic cull for 1938.
So Studebaker’s tale is an example of how the shifting
meaning of words can influence many things.
Still, if in 1937 any association with Hitler had become
distasteful for a US corporation, even by 1940, some two years after the Nazi’s
most publicized pogrom against the Jews (Kristallnacht
(Night of Broken Glass)), Charlie Chaplin (1889–1977) released his satirical comedy
The Great Dictator which parodied both dictators (Hitler and Mussolini), his argument
being that however controversial it might be, “…Hitler must be laughed
at." He later admitted that had he
known in 1940 what would later be understood, he’d never have produced the
film.
Comrade Stalin’s favorite cars by the 1930s were the big Packards but he acknowledged the importance of Studebaker trucks supplied by the US under Lend-Lease and the company also greatly benefited; like many US corporations, some of its golden years came during World War II (1939-1945) when industrial capacity was given over to government contracts fulfilling military demand. A variety of materiel was produced but Studebaker’s most notable contribution to the war effort was the versatile US6 (G630 in the government purchasing system) 2½ (short) ton 6x6 trucks, over 150,000 of which were supplied to the Soviet Union. Built in many configurations, the most memorable adaptation by the Red Army was as a mobile platform for the BM-31-12 (nickname: Andryusha) Katyusha rocket launcher, known to the enemy as “Stalin’s organs” because of the distinctive sound; before drones emerged as the preferred front-line weapon, the Russian army widely deployed such rockets in the “special military operation” (invasion) against Ukraine. The US6 proved popular with Red Army troops who judged it superior to the locally-made ZIS-5 & GAZ-AA and better even than the captured German trucks with Maybach engines which (belying the German reputation for “good beer, good engines, good sausages”), were prone to overheating under extreme loads, unlike the Studebakers that never boiled.
Tough, durable and easy to repair, it was the WS6 that made possible the movement of the Red Army at the scale and speed achieved by 1943-1944 and it proved equally adept at handing the both the muddy and freezing conditions that became notorious on the Eastern Front; affectionately the troops nicknamed the things “Studer”. The tale circulated that comrade Stalin even wrote a letter of appreciation to Studebaker, mentioning how important the US6 had been to the Red Army; that turned out to be apocryphal but in the Studebaker archives there are documents from Soviet officials expressing their satisfaction with the machines. The flow of information between across the Iron Curtain was once highly restricted and one Soviet diplomat, arriving in the US in the late 1960s, expressed surprise Studebaker was no longer in business. Brought up on the legends of the part the WS6 had played in Great Patriotic War, he'd assumed the company would still be a fixture in US manufacturing. Of course, if corporate comings & goings in Detroit (actually South Bend, Indiana, where Studebakers were built, a place that wouldn’t again make the international headlines until 2020 when Pete Buttigieg (b 1982; US secretary of transportation 2021-2025), who served as mayor from 2012 to 2020 sought the Democratic presidential nomination), were a mystery to Russians, the Kremlin was just as opaque, even to experienced diplomats. Probably no figure in the twentieth century was as dominating a dictator as comrade Stalin but even at the Yalta Conference (February 1945) there were senior figures in the US State Department and the UK’s Foreign Office who believed the one Russians knew as their vozhd (from the Russian вождь (vožd) (chieftain, leader) was a figure whose freedom of action was constrained by “hard liners in Moscow”.
The Hijab Police
Of the many “morality police” forces that have existed in countries with a majority Islamic population, the best known was Afghanistan's Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice which actually pre-dated the Taliban takeover in 1996 but they certainly deployed it with an enthusiasm which went much beyond it functioning as “burka police” and in one form or another, it actually operated for most of the (first) post-Taliban era. When the Taliban regained power in 2021, immediately they created the "Ministry of Invitation, Guidance and Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice" and, in a nice touch, allocated as its headquarters the building formerly used by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs.
The institution is infamous also in Iran. In the West, it’s usually referred to as the “morality
police” and among women the sardonic slang is “hijab police” but technically,
the instrument of the Islamic Republic of Iran which enforces, inter alia, the laws governing the
wearing of the hijab is گشت ارشاد (Gašt-e Eršād (Guidance Patrol)). On 16 September 2022, the hijab police arrested Mahsa Amini (2001-2022) because she was wearing her hijab in “an un-Islamic
way”. While in custody, Ms Amini suffered
a medical event, dying two days later without recovering consciousness, the hijab police claiming the cause of death was heart failure, induced by pre-existing conditions. Her family dispute this, saying the evidence
suggests she was severely beaten and many witnesses have confirmed she was tortured
in the back of a van before arriving at a hijab police office.
Handy guide for the hijab police. Not only must hijab must be worn correctly but clothing must also be (1) not brightly colored, (2) not patterned with extravagant designs or shapes and (3) be loose enough that the shape of the body is not discernible.
Her death triggered waves of protests in Iran, which, on the basis of footage seen in the West, seem dominated by school girls and young women; that's not unique in the context of political protest but is historically unusual. With protest signs and banners rendered in TikTok-friendly English, the headline issue is of course the matter of the hijab and whether women should be beaten to death for letting a lock of hair slip from beneath but the protesters are making clear they're there to highlight corruption (noting the poverty of most while the clerical elite have become very rich), the structure of the state, the economy and the very question of whether the republic should be an Islamic theocracy. The ayatollahs are no doubt well aware that the standard calculation in political science is that if 3½% of the population can be mobilized to revolt, regimes can be toppled and most recently, the Afghan Taliban did it with a fraction of that. For many reasons, Afghanistan may be a special case and the Iranian state, on paper, is much better equipped to suppress internal dissent but then the security apparatuses around Hosni Mubarak and Muammar Gaddafi (circa 1942–2011; Libyan dictator 1969-2011) both looked impregnable until the volume of the protesters reached critical mass. These things are however hard to judge from afar, Bashar al-Assad (b 1965; ophthalmologist and Syria dictator 2000-2024) looked vulnerable long before Gaddafi and Mubarak fell yet he sat as dictator in Damascus for another 14 years. The ayatollahs of course watched things with concern but so did individuals in the Kremlin, aware their security apparatus proved inadequate to execute the battle plan of the "special military action" in Ukraine and observed, in a nice echo of the 1979 revolution, the protesters in Tehran again chanting the cry once spat against the Shah: “Death to the Dictator!”.
